“We can either live in a paranoid politically correct world frantically trying not to offend the Hitlers and Mohammeds, and blaming their victims when they kill, or we can be free men and women who have chosen to take the power to defend our rights into our own hands.

While a thousand organizations use the Holocaust as a platform for speeches about tolerance, Children Of Jewish Holocaust Survivors [Jews Can Shoot] is conducting firearms training… Freedom is not defended with empty idealism easily perverted into appeasement of evil, but with the force of arms.”

All too many of the other great tragedies of history - Stalin's atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few - were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece... If a few hundred Jewish fighter in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

FTA: So we cycle back to the point about political judgment. If Swalwell wants to be more grown-up than the tweeps, one thing he could consider is gaining insight about why America’s Founders thought of the Second Amendment as a basis for the people to hold the federal government accountable, and force it to stay within its constitutional limits.

It wasn’t because the Founders thought local groups of armed citizens could prevail in combat against the full resources of the central government. Even in a world without A-10s, armored tanks, networked surveillance, and over-the-horizon targeting of precision weapons, the Founders didn’t expect that.

Their expectation was instead that armed citizens would be a continuing deterrent to government excesses. The cost of trying to ram through overreach on an armed people would be too high, and the central government would rarely if ever be willing to start that fight.

It’s hard to say which realm Eric Swalwell of California shows worst in with his latest tweet series: political judgment, understanding of the Constitution, or understanding of the impact of a nuclear detonation.

On Friday, as part of an ongoing Twitter dialogue on gun confiscation, Swalwell tweeted the following in response to a tweep angry about the “confiscation” threat. The tweep — @Rambobiggs — had vowed to fight back against any such attempt.

The “common ground” reference is a nice — if laughable — touch, after Swalwell acknowledged favoring gun confiscation in an earlier tweet exchange:

But more fundamentally, Swalwell clarified that he can’t be taken seriously by going high-order so promptly with the allusion to nukes. In terms of political judgment, “We’ll nuke you, fool — but hey, I’ll signal virtue here; let’s find common ground” is not impressive diplomacy with angry citizens.

Nor is blanket endorsement of bans and confiscations a good sign that Swalwell understands the U.S. Constitution and can be relied on to uphold it. It’s rather the opposite. Apparently, Swalwell urgently demands to do something that the Constitution would stop him from doing.

Thank you for your patience. In addition to the United States, Canada and Mexico, we now ship to Europe. More items coming.

Sign Up to Stay Informed

Subscribe to our Newsletter!Sign up to get more information and updates delivered from Jews Can Shoot.

Your Email:

First Name:

Last Name:

Thanks for signing up!

By submitting this form, you are granting: Jews Can Shoot, 365 E. Avenida De Los Arboles , Thousand Oaks, California, 91360, United States, https://www.jewscanshoot.com permission to email you. You may unsubscribe via the link found at the bottom of every email. (See our Email Privacy Policy for details.)

"All too many of the other great tragedies of history—Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few—were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. ... If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars." — Silveira v Lockyer, (9th Cir. 2003) (Kozinski, J. dissenting.)